Anti-war Protesters Want End of Zaytun Unit

I didn’t know making toilets was considered being at war:

Anti-war groups said they planned to gather about 1,000 protesters for a march through downtown Seoul Saturday to press their demand for the withdrawal of all Korean troops from Iraq.

The protesters will also oppose any plan by their government to contribute to U.N. peacekeeping forces in Lebanon, because doing so would be tantamount to tacit support for Washington’s Middle East policy, the organizers said.

They will also oppose the planned relocation of most of the 30,000 U.S. troops in South Korea to an expanded base in Pyeongtaek, 70 kilometers south of Seoul, by 2008.

I love this quote from a protester in a seperate Yonhap article:

“It is time that they come home. They’ve completed the stated mission of securing order in Irbil. It was only wishful thinking on the government’s part that the deployment will help solve pending issues between Seoul and Washington, including how to deal with North Korea’s nuclear weapons program,” Kong Sun-gyung, chief of the peace establishment center at the People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, said Thursday.

“Securing order in Irbil?” There was never a problem of keeping order in Irbil to begin with. Plus you have to leave the base in order to restore order anyway which for the most part the Zaytun unit does not do. Having personally been to Kurdistan, the area is by far the safest area in Iraq. This is the area where the US military has R&R facilities set up and troops traveling through the area do not need to wear body armor or helmets. I absolutely loved Kurdistan and it’s people while I was there.

Hanging out on a compound making toilets in the same area where the US military goes for R&R leave is not what I consider going to war.

Here is another money quote from the anti-war crowd:

“The South Korean government has lost its cause for having troops there, and has failed to win practical gains in return for the deployment,” Kong said, noting that the U.S. has not acted in ways to benefit South Korea in its dealings with North Korea, while no economic benefits have materialized in Iraq.

Is that what the Zaytun mission is all about, what Korea get’s out of it? Not about helping rebuild an area that has been repressed by the Sunni Baathist Saddam Hussein regime for decades? What Korea get’s out of it, according to this guy, is more important and since they aren’t getting as much out of it as they thought, it is time to bring them back home.

I have been from the beginning skeptical of the Zaytun mission because I believed that if the politicians don’t have the stomach for casualties than don’t send soldiers to war zones because the US needs soldiers that can help restore security and rebuild Iraq, not political symbols. The Zaytun unit was originally going to be deployed to the city of Kirkuk and be given operational command of the zone, which would have been considered quite an honor to the ROK military because only Britain and Poland controlled zones outside of the US military’s control. This undoubtedly would have built closer US ties with Korea much like what Poland and the US now have from their involvement in Iraq.

However, since the Korean government had no political will to take casualties, which they most certainly would have if they accepted the Kirkuk mission, they instead opted for the friendly Kurdish area instead and kept their soldiers for the most part confined to the camp. This in turn made the Korean presence in Iraq irrelevant and any perceived political and financial gains from the US irrelevant as well. So maybe the protesters are right, maybe it is time to come home.

UPDATE: Here is a great link from Budaechigae about what a former Zaytun officer thinks of serving in Iraq:

The original purpose of sending Korean troops there was to rebuild Iraq. But we went there and spent most of our time in maintaining our own living facilities. We are too withdrawn and I think it’s problematic. The people high up in the ranks are so concerned about our safety. For them, a safe return is more important than accomplishing anything.

I don’t know how South Korea’s sending troops has contributed to the national interest. I get the feeling that we didn’t offer something really useful for Iraqis. We did so for the sake of our national image in the outside world. American soldiers in Korea enjoyed a good reputation in the past because they gave chewing gum and chocolates to the locals. Perhaps my government is thinking about something similar. Personally, I believe that if we had sent actual combat troops to Iraq, we would have gotten a lot better deal from the United States.

Let me make it clear I have no problem with the ROK Army because I think they could handle increased responsibilities in Iraq. However, as this officer describes, if they are not allowed to do anything because of the lack of political will, than bring them home.